-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
measuring shot
- Thread starter chuck-ia
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Yes, that is how it works out. 1/8 oz of shot for each 10 gr increase. That is with lead shot, steel is a lighter and takes more to actually weigh what lead does.
Here are a few equal volume loads:
oz. shot-----Dr. powder-------Grains
3/4-------------2--------------55
7/8-------------2 1/4----------62
1---------------2 1/2----------68
1 1/8-----------2 3/4----------75
1 1/4-----------3--------------82
1 3/8-----------3 1/4----------89
1 1/2-----------3 1/2----------96
1 5/8-----------3 3/4----------102
1 3/4-----------4--------------109
1 7/8-----------4 1/4----------116
2---------------4 1/2----------123
2 1/8-----------4 3/4----------130
2 1/4-----------5--------------137
oz. shot-----Dr. powder-------Grains
3/4-------------2--------------55
7/8-------------2 1/4----------62
1---------------2 1/2----------68
1 1/8-----------2 3/4----------75
1 1/4-----------3--------------82
1 3/8-----------3 1/4----------89
1 1/2-----------3 1/2----------96
1 5/8-----------3 3/4----------102
1 3/4-----------4--------------109
1 7/8-----------4 1/4----------116
2---------------4 1/2----------123
2 1/8-----------4 3/4----------130
2 1/4-----------5--------------137
bullofthewoods
32 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2006
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 0
How does the difference in shot size fit into this? Is there a large difference, volumetrically and by weight, when using a powder measure to measure #2 vs #9 shot. I would have to think there would be more individual pieces of shot in a volume of #9 than #2, thus making the payload slightly heavier, or is the difference negligible.
Very useful information, thanks
Bull
Very useful information, thanks
Bull
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,537
- Reaction score
- 89
I am sure there is a difference, because the larger sizes of shot allow more air to exist between the pellets in the volume measure. It would also vary depending on the shot size. So, the only answer is to measure equal volumes of different size shot, and then weigh each of the measures to see what change in weight occurs. I will do this later today with #8 and #5 shot, as I have both on hand, and report back.
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,537
- Reaction score
- 89
To Flint and Talbert: I measured one ounce each of # 8, and #5 shot, by volume, with my Tedd Cash adjustable Powder measure with the funnel attached. I set the measure's markings for 68 grains of powder by volume.
# 8 shot weighted, on my balance scale, 403.5 grains;
#5 shot weighted 427.2 grains.
These weights are both short of the 427.5 grains to the ounce measurement, although the #5 shot could not have gotten closer! I was surprised that the #8 shot came up so short. But, since I don't think the markings on the volume measure was ever intended to measure shot, but instead is calibrated to measure FFg black powder, I don't think it should surprise us with these results.
Talbert: you are correct about doing okay. However, if you really are counting your pellets on the paper, you need to know exactly how many pellets you started out with in the barrel before you fired the gun. You can't accurately calculate pattern percentages without knowing the actual pellet count of the load of shot sent down range.
Now I have counted pellets, one at a time before. It is boring, labor intensive work. You would be amazed to know that there are 264 pellets of #6 shot in a 2 3/4 .410 shotgun shell manufactured by Winchester-Western ! I believe the load is near 7/8 oz, but was marked on the box, 3/4 or 5/8 oz. Go figure. My willingness to do that work knocked an attempted murder charge down to unlawful Use of weapons in a shooting case I did back in 1971, and saved the client 10 years in prison! Without knowing how many pellets were in that shell, the cops were trying to call my client a liar because he said he only fired one shot at the assailant( victim- depending on your point of view.) The cops recovered the gun- a single barrel, single shot, break-open .410 H&R, and one spent shell, the one they had in evidence. But the man had been bent over, and took some of the shot in his right shoulder, and the rest in his stomach, on a downward raking angle. The X-rays showed shot dispersed all through his abdomen( as shot is want to do when it hits flesh- something the cops working the case did not know, either.) The man was not wearing a shirt when he was shot. If he was, the police would have known he was lying when he told investigators he had been shot 7 times! The investigators counted 280 shot on the X-ray, but admitted that they may have double counted some. When I showed them my counts for three cartridges( 264, 264, 263) , with each cartridge and its shot saved in a glass vial, and handed them a box of W-W .410 shotgun shells, with 22 shells left, to do their own counts, they politely declined my offer, and said it was very hard to believe there was so much shot in such a small shell.
Back to the subject. I am as surprised as you may be that the smaller shot weighs so much less than predicted. But, it does show there is a difference in weight depending on the size of the shot being used. You can either just use the lighter charge, and pattern it, for use in the field, or you can make an adjustment with the volume measure to throw a particular WEIGHT BY MEASURE, and then pattern that load for use in the field. Either works for me. I think If I am hunting something is hard to kill as a turkey, I may just make sure I know how many pellets I am actually throwing and what the weight of the shot is by scale, rather than using the volume measure exclusively. If you are going to use one of the formulas for powder and shot, 1:1, 3:4, 1:1.5, etc. I think you will definitely want to know that actual weight of the shot chosen, so you can make sure that ratio is correct. Otherwise, you are just guessing at performance on paper and in the field.
# 8 shot weighted, on my balance scale, 403.5 grains;
#5 shot weighted 427.2 grains.
These weights are both short of the 427.5 grains to the ounce measurement, although the #5 shot could not have gotten closer! I was surprised that the #8 shot came up so short. But, since I don't think the markings on the volume measure was ever intended to measure shot, but instead is calibrated to measure FFg black powder, I don't think it should surprise us with these results.
Talbert: you are correct about doing okay. However, if you really are counting your pellets on the paper, you need to know exactly how many pellets you started out with in the barrel before you fired the gun. You can't accurately calculate pattern percentages without knowing the actual pellet count of the load of shot sent down range.
Now I have counted pellets, one at a time before. It is boring, labor intensive work. You would be amazed to know that there are 264 pellets of #6 shot in a 2 3/4 .410 shotgun shell manufactured by Winchester-Western ! I believe the load is near 7/8 oz, but was marked on the box, 3/4 or 5/8 oz. Go figure. My willingness to do that work knocked an attempted murder charge down to unlawful Use of weapons in a shooting case I did back in 1971, and saved the client 10 years in prison! Without knowing how many pellets were in that shell, the cops were trying to call my client a liar because he said he only fired one shot at the assailant( victim- depending on your point of view.) The cops recovered the gun- a single barrel, single shot, break-open .410 H&R, and one spent shell, the one they had in evidence. But the man had been bent over, and took some of the shot in his right shoulder, and the rest in his stomach, on a downward raking angle. The X-rays showed shot dispersed all through his abdomen( as shot is want to do when it hits flesh- something the cops working the case did not know, either.) The man was not wearing a shirt when he was shot. If he was, the police would have known he was lying when he told investigators he had been shot 7 times! The investigators counted 280 shot on the X-ray, but admitted that they may have double counted some. When I showed them my counts for three cartridges( 264, 264, 263) , with each cartridge and its shot saved in a glass vial, and handed them a box of W-W .410 shotgun shells, with 22 shells left, to do their own counts, they politely declined my offer, and said it was very hard to believe there was so much shot in such a small shell.
Back to the subject. I am as surprised as you may be that the smaller shot weighs so much less than predicted. But, it does show there is a difference in weight depending on the size of the shot being used. You can either just use the lighter charge, and pattern it, for use in the field, or you can make an adjustment with the volume measure to throw a particular WEIGHT BY MEASURE, and then pattern that load for use in the field. Either works for me. I think If I am hunting something is hard to kill as a turkey, I may just make sure I know how many pellets I am actually throwing and what the weight of the shot is by scale, rather than using the volume measure exclusively. If you are going to use one of the formulas for powder and shot, 1:1, 3:4, 1:1.5, etc. I think you will definitely want to know that actual weight of the shot chosen, so you can make sure that ratio is correct. Otherwise, you are just guessing at performance on paper and in the field.
Similar threads
